Edit: and guess what, if Apple didn’t have advance notice of this do you think their own build process could have handled it? I’d bet money on “no”. XBS takes hours itself to spin up a new build, and with the usual testing a validation you see even the fastest updates taking at least a day. Back in iOS 7 it took them two to get critical fixes out the door, and patching the unc0ver 0-day took like a week for reference.
That's typical Apple, they are allergic to technical info and error display, when things are not working, there's no way to know why.
Steve Jobs used to say it over and over again when criticized by angry developers that their main focus will always be users instead of developers and that the latter will just have to suck it up if they want to get a piece of the lucrative Apple user base pie.
In comedic contrast, here's a sweaty Steve Balmer shouting "Developers!" for half a minute.
Ah, the early 2000's, with Apple and Microsoft battling it out, what a time to be alive.
From Jobs's perspective here, App Store developers are also customers. So while he is talking about starting at the customers' perspective, rather than the engineers, I believe he's only talking about Apple engineers. 3rd party software devs that are building the Apple ecosystem are:
1. Paying for the privelege of being an Apple Developer
2. Paying Apple a portion of their own earnings.
3. Opting to develop for Apple, rather than other platforms
So if we are Apple developers, we are customers, and according to Jobs's philosophy laid out here, it's Apple's job to deliver value to us (as well as the actual end users).
AppStore was about enforcing expanded Human Interface Guidelines to ensure overall product quality while getting some money to the indie devs that had historically starved due to market fragmentation. The combination of overall user experience, apps and Tim Apple’s buying up all the manufacturing capacity in ChYna (to lockout competitors —a lesson they learned from the PC knock-off days) assured ..$2T!
That's their value. Not that their software releases will always be perfect.
None of you will stop making iOS apps over this.
Full disclosure - I have developed many apps for iOS, but have never monetized them. I have used both Hybrid and native tech to do this. It has been probably 5 years since I've done Hybrid and about 15 months since I made a native app.
Honestly we just expect everything of everyone else and nothing of ourselves anymore. So they had some wonky version releases, like none of us on here have ever had issues like that before.
I found the concept of monopsony to be quite interesting here.
Developers are users as well. In the early days of computing, both terms were actually synonymous. If Apple designed the user interface of its programming environment so that the software developer cannot find out what went wrong and why, Apple deserves all the hatred it gets.
Also, this "lucrative Apple pie" is the only reason anyone even cares about it. If money is removed from the equation, I have no doubt developers would rather invest their time on a Linux system that doesn't insult their intelligence.
Android error: App displays error and disappears
Windows error: App displays error, possibly writes to error log, dumps memory to disk, and suggests you visit a URL that provides no useful information.
None of them are great, but at least Windows gives you something to search for.
Not having the problem in the first place would be better. Automatically solving the problem would be great! But, for once ever, I can safely say that this does sometimes fix problems.
The only real downsides versus Windows 10 are the Start Screen and the conhost implementation, but Classic Shell and Powershell fix both of those.
For example my auntie calling me in tears because windows "had performed an illegal operation" (verbatim error message text) and she was terrified she was going to prison.
Many non-dev folks around me have resolved windows errors by typing the error message or code into google - if they are spesific and well written, they enable you to do that!
This is just one example that I vividly recall. The simplest of operation downloading of an update, only apple can make it as big a nightmare as it was. Now they do a lot of things fabulously but when the fail they just fall on their face and ignore it or they would fail where I can't even imagine how to fail this bad.
The latest blunder (again download), my iPhone lost it's wifi after a fall and wow! behold you can't download an update over cellular. Apple will make you save your money by not using your expensive cellular data after all it's so much more expensive than your $800 phone.
Then you google it and the first 300 results say you need to install their malware to fix the problem. Never change, Internet... never change.
See TinkerTool for an easy way to enable such options:
My company can build and maintain a really big program with a minimal number of developers because Windows is so backwards-compatible. No need to rebuild everything every 3 years because APIs changed or some framework got deprecated. It's just running and running and running on our customer's hardware.
Here was an interesting bit:
> I first heard about this from one of the developers of the hit game SimCity, who told me that there was a critical bug in his application: it used memory right after freeing it, a major no-no that happened to work OK on DOS but would not work under Windows where memory that is freed is likely to be snatched up by another running application right away. The testers on the Windows team were going through various popular applications, testing them to make sure they worked OK, but SimCity kept crashing. They reported this to the Windows developers, who disassembled SimCity, stepped through it in a debugger, found the bug, and added special code that checked if SimCity was running, and if it did, ran the memory allocator in a special mode in which you could still use memory after freeing it.
Maybe the knowledge of how to make backwards compatible systems is even slowly leaving with the old guard and they just will never know how to make it work ever again.
A colleague of mine is very active in Microsoft's GitHub repos and is complaining daily that no employee there seems to know how their own software works. He routinely needs to explain Microsoft employees that their ideas will not work because of $generic_windows_api_behavior.
Look at the US space program for example. It took them 12 years from the first man in space to go to the moon. Nowadays Space X, Blue Origin etc. seem to have to re-learn everthing and edge themselves slowly towards launching manned missions. They very likely have the books about space flight but not much experience.
I might be conflating causation and correlation, admittedly. I've always enjoyed the hardware aspect of computers, so it's hard to look at this sort of thing completely objectively.
> statically compiled with no non-kernel dependencies whatsoever
I'd love that. Would be great if we could even get rid of the C library. Compilers should emit Linux system call code directly.
Look at how many DLLs get updated in a typical windows security update.
Most of those would have been permanent security vulnerabilities if everything was statically linked.
It's too bad they just don't make VM stuff available, and make it available for a long time.
Yes it might be only nostalgia, but why don't they have something simple like dosbox for macos that would run mac classic apps or recent stuff.
I guess you just have to keep your old systems around
I've downloaded lots of stuff from google. Its rarely slow.
I use cloudfront on AWS - also rarely slow.
Apple - often slow. They have billions - is there something wrong with their caching layer at ISPs etc?
Apple falls over after big events for developers etc. Is there not a cashing layer locally at ISP level - ie, push '209 out in advance to ISP cache, then everyone can gobble it up when you announce and link on your website?
A Mac Mini with a 10G Ethernet port can saturate 10G.
So, how are they not fast?
Or they could have just launched both on Friday.
a: lacking the qualities needed for effective action
b: unable to function properly
- Add to homescreen dialog
- Background sync
- Proper push notifications
- Proper WASM support (a lot of features are missing)
Honestly, at this point, the government should step in, like they did at the end of the last century with Microsoft. Walled gardens hurt innovation a lot, and the App Store in combination with the restricted web on iOS are the ultimate expression of the former.
I would personally like to continue paying higher prices to protect myself from low-quality background-syncing byte-code-obfuscated web-pages with push notifications, please.
Just enable the API Apple, I bet you already have it hidden behind some flags.
plus, they get the added bonus that they can demand you pay 30% of various transitions that they couldn't demand if you just left it a website that happened to be PWA
Their incentives are entirely aligned not to support the latest web standards and not allow any other browsers on iOS to add them
Yes, Apple wants us to spend all of our time interacting with / committed to their users. No, that aren’t maliciously trying to steal our time from other platforms. The thought chain ends with their platform, never considering that we even have other platforms to support.
A self-obsessed outlook is different from a deliberately sabotaging business plan, even when they present the same outward behaviors. Occam’s razor.
They could make every API opt-in or propose improvements, but they won't.
With IE6, people were at least allowed to install more capable browsers. With iOS there are no other browsers. Only user interfaces around Safari webviews.
Besides that, according to the latest App Store rules, apps that just surface cross platform services aren’t required to have in app purchases.
> How many apps [could] be viable as a website if only iOS Safari had push notifications[?]
I’d say a lot.
> [How many of them] would actually bring in any significant amount of revenue?
Adding this caveat doesn’t change my answer—but I really don’t like what it's implying. Software is not suddenly without value just because it doesn’t make money.
Yet you didn’t name any. If that were the case, you should be able to name the equivalent web apps on Android that must be apps on iOS.
> Software is not suddenly without value just because it doesn’t make money.
So where are those “valuable” web apps on Android? Also revenue is the most objective way to measure value.
Nonsense. Wikipedia must be worthless for you? What about air? Do you feel you'd breathe with more satisfaction if someone was profiting from the air you breathe?
On the other hand, there's plenty of immensely profitable things that have negative value. Cigarettes? Oil? Weapons? Opioids? I could go on and on.
“Value” has a definite meaning in economics. If someone is willing to pay for something, it has value to them.
What better choice do we have than to measure value across a population? How much value a population places on something based on how much they are willing to pay is objective. Whether that value is utilitarian or based on other factors is subjective.
Are we really arguing about basic supply and demand? Yes suppliers have methods to drive demand.
Reddit, Trello, Twitter. Probably Discord and Slack too.
I haven't used Android in years but I certainly don't see why these wouldn't work as web apps if you had push notifications. All the functionality is there.
That's why you're asking the wrong question.
You should see a proliferation of cases where companies create an iOS app and a web app for everyone else.
You're asking the wrong question.
Could it possibly be that HN posters are wrong and PWAs aren’t good enough on Android either?
Would they enable web notifications if it was universally available? Yes. Would they enable it just for Android users? Some do. Does this say something about the quality of PWA's? You tell me. You seem to be adamant that the web sucks, yet literally millions of companies are succesful on the web without accompanying apps.
Where are all the developers who are being forced to create iOS apps but are “saving money” by not creating Android apps because PWA support is so good?
1. Web, iOS, Android
2. Web, iOS - since PWAs are suppose to be “good enough for Android”.
But you hardly ever see #2. Why is that?
May I suggest trying to outsource this small app to a freelancer? It could be a quite time- and cost-effective small project for someone who already has extensive experience with iOS.
People just allow everything and then get overloaded by all the worthless interruptions.
I know how to design and build things with my hands. I also know how to design logos, websites and other things. I can code and enjoy building and maintaining the network of websites I built in the past 15 years.
But I feel I'm spreading myself too thin when I'm also learning to code in React or Dart (Flutter) for a single one-off project. I fear I won't be able to put in the hours required to become adequately proficient in another field that's constantly changing.
The rest of what you said sounds pretty on par with the rest of the self taught programmers I’ve met (me being one of them).
I don't know why Apple is allowed to keep other browser engines out of their system, but probably just because the relevant people just don't understand that the Chrome/FF/etc. on iOS are just a Safari with a different UI and that it gives Apple about half (depending on country; in the US probably more) of the mobile browser share and users just the chance to either use Android or be stuck with Safari.
In addition, the author obviously doesn't know that the before mentioned push notification API is not just used for regular push notifications, but is also required for other use-cases like messengers for example.
Nevertheless, that is besides the point as the rendering engine is not the sole source of browser differences. I am not saying the Googles high market share isn't a problem itself, but that Apple is abusing their market position to hold back the development of the web (by not implementing relevant APIs and not allowing competing browser engines on their platform).
In my neck of the woods people most definitely do complain about Chrome, specifically the lack of privacy from being a Google product.
It’s a bit ironic, but browser engine monopoly on iOS is the only thing standing in the way of browser engine monopoly across all platforms.
The conversation is 100% about how much influence Apple should permit Google to have over the evolution of iOS.
are you really saying you would pay higher prices because you can' t press the "no" button and never visit the same website again?
It's not absurd to me to pay for platforms that attempt to preemptively remove filth rather than need to be on the constant lookout for filth. This is particularly true when most of these entire ecosystems (the web, app stores, video content) seem to be based on sneaking filth in front of your eyes at every available opportunity.
Making an hyperbole here, but wouldn't Mosaic 1993 edition solve every issue then?
I mean, removing features of course makes software more secure
Apple market is rich, it is the richest tech company, with the highest market valuation ever, one cannot avoid it
So it's gonna drive adoption no matter what
Like it did for Flash (right or wrong, they did it)
I was writing web applications during the 90s, they were called intranets back then, IE wasn't bad, it was simply unavoidable
And being unavoidable halted competition for more than a decade
On another side: having a platform that doesn't obey to common standards creates tech segregation
I remember seeing japanes phones 20 years ago, they were ahead of time,but unusable outside of Japan
Last but not least, having a flag that says "allow me to shoot myself in the foot of I want to" it's less hostile than "you don't know what you're doing let me handle it for you"
That escalated quickly
I never promoted Chrome, in fact I'm an old time Firefox users and in the 90s I owned a Netscape 3 gold license.
I don't write fronted software anymore, but writing for every browser means adhering to the standard
Apple has steered away more than any other vendor lately
Yes, which you’ll find if you do Safari adheres to quite well. Finding examples where it doesn’t is easy, just like on chrome. Which is why we have media queries and poly fills because it’s simply impossible to have a unified platform without one entity owning it. If you found out Chrome doesn’t render the same on linux as it doesn’t on windows, would you call this not adhering to the standard?
They don' t
Apple refused to implement 16 web API in Safari
> Which is why we have media queries and poly fills because it’s simply impossible to have a unified platform
And that' s why big players like Apple hat control a closed ecosystem shouldn't be allowed to be assholes
At least on Android I can install other browsers and other browser engines
Do you see the difference?
> Chrome doesn’t render the same on linux as it doesn’t on windows
that' s not true
Windows and Linux that have simply different font rendering engines and different native widgets
> would you call this not adhering to the standard?
In no part of the standard rendering is formalized
It wouldn't make sense
The way things are rendered is standardized, not the way they should look
> HTML is intended to apply to multiple media (it is a media-independent language). User agent implementors are encouraged to adapt the suggestions in this section to their target media.
OK and these APIs don’t stop real work.
> And that' s why big players like Apple hat control a closed ecosystem shouldn't be allowed to be assholes
And putting all that power into the hands of a single browser will not end well, so stop promoting Chrome or saying other browsers should be like Chrome. FF isn’t going to win.
> At least on Android I can install other browsers and other browser engines
Do you see the difference?
Yes, next question, do I care?
> that' s not true
100% true, read the dev blogs and understand the WM on linux is fundamentally different than windows or mac, therefore rendering is not exactly the same.
Standards help align, they do not force alignment. If safari implemented a p element as a span, then this is not following the spec. Choosing not to implement a portion of a modular spec, is still following the spec.
Yes, just like you’re free to never visit an annoying website asking to spam notifications you’re free to take away Apple’s decision making power you grant them by simply not buying an iphone.
That's a very common argument
But it doesn't get any less stupid with time.
I never owned an iPhone.
Because I am an adult homo sapiens that can take decisions for himself.
But you should know that if a standard exists, and the standard has been approved by a consortium, a consortium where Apple is a very important member, they should at least support what they signed for, instead of forcing developers to go through hoops just to support their platform.
When Elon Musk make Teslas he has to put airbags in them, stop lights, front lights, safety belts, they must pass crash tests, because that's the standard, otherwise he couldn't sell them as cars.
So if Apple believe that the standard that they approved is too dangerous, they can make their OS more secure, instead of putting the blame on developers.
> I’m a full stack dev, I understand what it takes to support safari and a majority of the time is actually Chrome being fast and loose with the standard
I am as well, I understand a closed platform when I see one.
> But the features lacking don’t stop meaningful work at all.
If only it was true...
It' s not lacking, it has been removed on purpose.
The web engine Safari is built from already supports those features.
You don't even understand the rules.
Notification APIs are in Webkit, the open source implementation of Safari.
Can you prove that Apple didn't remove standard APIs from their browser?
Every time I pickup an old iOS device the stupid thing is nags me to update it, 100 times. And you can't just click no you have to click multiple things to get it to fuck off.
Or ask browser vendors to have a global allow/deny flag for every Web API
I don't want websites asking me to enable notifications. 99.9% of the time, the answer is no.
I don't want websites asking me to enable location access. 99.9% of the time, the answer is NO.
Nor do I want them asking for permissions to install to my Home Screen (the answer is no), or to track me (the answer is NO).
>Or ask browser vendors to have a global allow/deny flag for every Web API
When possible, I've carefully configured my browser to automatically reject these requests, but instead of respecting that, these websites, with all their hubris, have chosen to circumvent my preferences by presenting shitty JS-based permission requests (as opposed to using the permissions UI built into the browser).
Each one of these new web APIs have significantly degraded my experience as an end user, by presenting a million permission dialogs whenever I'm visiting webpages, without providing me with any features of value (again, because I'm not ever, ever gonna trust some random website with these permissions).
Users don't care to pontificate about the virtues of the open web, they just want their stuff to work. And until the open web can provide a better user experience, of course users are going to flock to various walled gardens (App Stores, Facebook, etc...). Until we find a way to implement web standards elegantly, without degrading the user experience, the open web is always going to face an uphill battle over the relative safety of walled gardens.
I know I don't want them.
Apple is in the committee.
Beyond the "punch the monkey" game you mention, another massive problem is that web push notifications have just become another vector to deliver spam to users. If you look at devices belonging to "normal" users, you'll often see dozens of spammy web notifications (pornographic content, "30% off, BUY NOW", etc...). And because these are average users, they don't necessarily understand how to configure their devices to reduce or eliminate the spam.
Web push notifications needs a way to proactively filter out those that abuse the API, otherwise its doomed to become just another vector for spam that pisses off end users.
But bad websites are not something we are going to get rid of using only iPhones...
To get rid of the cookie notifications, I can at least set web pages I go to default to reader view.
The problem is that if Apple singlehandedly decide what's right and what isn't we are back to IE.
They just don't want web apps to rival with the native ones skipping the whole store experience and fee
But that's just speculation on my side, I have no data to back it up
On top of that, how many apps are really just surfacing server hosted services where there are no in app purchases?
Among the most popular there are
- Google maps Go
Do you have a citation?
same reason people write native apps on iOS
It's easier to track users, especially those users rich enough to buy high end phones and that will probably spend more money and the ROI is higher.
They also make PWAS to gain user base on low end phones and emerging markets.
And because making them is quite cheap.
Do you propose that Apple makes Safari more able to invade privacy?
If the only purpose of PWAs for Android is to make it easier to run on low end cheap phones - that’s really not a good argument is it with iOS is it? Even the 6s from 2015 is more performant than many mid range new Android phones.
But those reasons are weakening.
Buy the hardware, install lineageos, insert SIM?
I am not sure why other people being allowed to install other browsers on their phone would force you to do anything.
That still does not force you to install those browser engines.
If you want the apple approved apps, in the apple approve app store, that fine. But me using different settings does not force you to not use those approved apps.
Also an app can access and send more data than a browser window. Anything the webview can block can just get transmitted by the app itself separately. So there's no reason to block 3rd-party browser engines as the GP post says.
The real security issue is: if a bug in Safari is found (it happens quite often) users cannot use another browser in the meantime.
Not for most people.
At any rate, maybe you're so worried about single-page web apps being bad actors that you're happy Apple so severely hamstrings them, but I... just can't see a lot to worry about there. And if Apple let PWAs be even a little better on iOS than they are now, it would go at least some distance toward ameliorating complaints about the App Store.
Disappointingly, Apple makes an exception for their first party apps.
Native iOS notifications are opt-in
Frankly, because everyone I know uses iMessage.
an I not say that my mom, albeit being older than me, does not need her son's protection from malware and certainly does not need Apple to tell her what's right, just because she's older?
Is ageism permitted on HN?
Maybe she's smarter than us all...
So Web Browsing is a very imperfect measure of installed base. Worldwide estimates are that that less than 20% of mobile devices sold are iOS, roughly 15% iirc. It’s almost certain US sales percentages for iOS are much higher, but no where near 60%.
Sorry but this is not an effective way to gauge market share of a browser or a platform. That 60% figure you're throwing around is not an absolute metric. It's based only on visitors to websites that use the "Statcounter" tracking code. There definitely is a large margin of error using this to gather statistics about market share.
In comparison, the other commenter's link is actually more accurate because:
>This report is one of the series of reports which tracks mobile handset: Smartphone and Feature Phone shipments every quarter for more than 140 brands covering more than 95% of the total device shipments in the industry.
Tracking site visitors based on sporadic implementation of a tracker, vs getting actual numbers of units shipped/sold. I'm going with the actual numbers, not the sort-of-guessing of Statcounter.
(Disclosure: I work for Google)
Units shipped doesn't tell the whole story either, but it is a specific metric that doesn't suffer from bots gaming things or any of the other problems that using stats based on tracking code can lead to.
If they own the device, then I want my 1k back.
If you're trying to narrow your punishment to be specifically "the crime of not letting me pick my own browser rendering engine" then I can't help you. This is not a hill I even remotely interested in dying on or spending more time on.
iOS has a PWA-style add to home screen dialog, but it's part of Safari. It's accessed from the share sheet.
All of those sound like things that will be abused by the majority of developers the minute they are allowed to inflict them upon users, either willingly or commanded to by their overlords in the name of ""Engagement""
They look like pretty fucking pleasant places to be in!
What do you even define as """innovation"""?
Honest question, I'd love to see some actual answers here instead of the usual canned hyperbole.
So far Apple's users are mostly satisfied with them, happily voting with their wallets, and the only people complaining about Apple are mostly the developers and companies who want unfettered access to iOS' users, and I haven't heard any good reasons from them other than "we want to maximize our own profits."
> Apple’s iOS rules would not have allowed for the invention of the web browser. Let that sink in. They would have rejected one of the most important technical innovations in the history of computing. Microsoft‘s bully tactic of making IE free seems quaint in comparison.
> But here’s the kicker: think of all the other amazing ideas that haven’t gotten a chance to be invented because they aren’t allowed on mobile devices. Mosaic happened less than 10 years after the Macintosh. We very well might have already had a browser-caliber invention by now.
> Just for people asking: the flagrant violations of AppStore policy that web browsers would be rejected for in this hypothetical are:
> 1) Running outside code
> 2) Allowing payments that circumvent Apple’s IAP
> 3) Allowing access to NSFW content
More commentary: https://mjtsai.com/blog/2020/08/25/potential/
It’s hard to give specific examples about innovation that hasn’t happened, if only because not everyone is sufficiently innovative to come up with truly groundbreaking ideas.
I doubt any of the original Mosaic developers had any idea just how important their original innovation would become.
It's hard, but not because of prohibited innovation. It's because we have android, and it doesn't have neither ios rules nor a fantastic potential innovation that breaks the deal with apple. There is simply no example that could be used as a good enough argument. Apple users do not live in a vacuum as well, many of them have seen or used other platforms and still stick with ios as it is.
>iOS rules would not have allowed for the invention of the web browser. Let that sink in.
Web browser is a highly secure piece of software, protected on par or even harder than the os itself. If any ios app could freely download, compile and execute an arbitrary code from the internet, that would be a world-wide security and privacy disaster every few weeks. Let that sink in instead.
It sounds like you’re saying iOS is insecure compared to WebKit and Blink, and that they can be trusted to run arbitrary code downloaded from arbitrary untrusted sources, but iOS cannot.
That’s a pretty damning indictment of the state of iOS, if it’s less capable of sandboxing than a browser, despite having tight coupling between hardware and software.
> Let that sink in instead.
Tragically, you’re probably right too.
People are free to "innovate" and experiment and invent on Android and the PC, and if an innovation is deemed desirable on Apple's curated platform — which they are perfectly within their rights to control, and millions of users continue to be happy with that — then Apple will make a provision for it.
On iOS, there would be a whole host of problems with allowing third-party browser engines and app stores that the people clamoring for looser restrictions have yet to address:
Not the least of which is: How would you enforce a user's settings for privacy and parental controls on third-party browsers and app stores?
They've been working with developers for a long time on the new App Clips functionality and that's been open for developers to start working.
So I am not following what is this article is saying? It seems like they're suggesting that Apple should release iOS a few days after announcing, but, that isn't enough time for most developers to test and release updates for a major iOS update; but Apple never intended those few days to be the only time developers had.
Yes, developers should have already been working with the iOS betas and already have some confidence that things will work against the final release-- but there is no substitute for actually testing against the final release build. In this case, iOS 14 Beta 8 appears to be mostly identical to the GM Seed build (what released to devs yesterday, and what will release to the public today), but that, historically, has not always been the case-- in some cases, bugs get fixed in between the last beta build and the GM seed; in others, new bugs get introduced.
Usually there's a period of time between announcement and when it ships, such that a developer can get the release version of Xcode (if necessary), do some final testing, then send any updates to Apple for review. With enough lead time that their updated app can be available on the App Store the same day as the iOS update being available.
That isn't really possible this time around.
Say the iOS update has brand new features. Your app can't take advantage of those fancy new features and your users don't get them until next week either.
Possible marketing, usually Apple has categories in the App Store for apps that support the latest features or are ready for that iOS version. They could in theory do this next week I guess, but point is there's excitement today, and will be less next week.
Possible bugs in your current app that aren't fixed but exist only in the latest iOS. If you base your entire process on past experience you planned to release bug fixes for iOS 14 with a larger update and now those updates aren't available to a majority of your userbase.
Edit: removed a part that was inaccurate.
Point two seems weak. The idea that Apple won’t promote apps with the new features when they are released makes no sense at all. You make it sound like this is unlikely, but I don’t see why you’d think that.
As for excitement - what excitement are we talking about? Users will get app updates automatically as they become available.
Are you suggesting that users typically buy a whole load of new apps on the one day iOS updates ship, but only if those apps have features only supported by the new OS? That would be an interesting fact if true, but it would also be supported by data, which I don’t see anywhere.
I’d speculate that users more often look for new apps when they get a new phone - which is supported by the data on Christmas app installs, and isn’t affected by this.
So we’re left with the possibility that the developer has bugs in the last iOS 13 version of their app that did not manifest under Beta 8, but do manifest under the GM.
I agree this is not impossible, although very unlikely to affect all but the tiniest handful of apps. Beta 8 and GM are unlikely to have significant changes of the kind that might expose such bugs, but again I agree it’s not impossible.
This seems like an extremely exotic case, and certainly in no way justifies Apple being called an ‘Asshole’, except by someone who has other reasons for wanting to malign them.
The expectation is that apps will support the new features on day one. Because that's how it has worked in the past.
> what excitement are we talking about? Users will get app updates automatically as they become available.
Again, historically, apps support the new features on day one. That won't be the case with this release because there's no way an App developer will be able to ship an app to App Store review in 24 hours and have the app available the same day.
> Are you suggesting that users typically buy a whole load of new apps on the one day iOS updates ship, but only if those apps have features only supported by the new OS?
I'm not so sure about buying new apps, I am saying that typically existing apps get updates that take advantage of new features and those are typically available on day one of an iOS update and won't be this year.
I don't think iOS 14 has any major game changing features, so I don't think we'll see a massive buy in of new apps or anything. But if this trend happens again with a release that DOES have major new features then it's a big disappointment.
> So we’re left with the possibility that the developer has bugs in the last iOS 13 version of their app that did not manifest under Beta 8, but do manifest under the GM.
Keep in mind that developers on iOS tend to think in terms of larger updates. So an app developer may release a new major version on the same day as iOS 14, or iOS 13, etc.
These are typically 'free' updates for existing users, but they're whole version updates and come with a larger set of changes.
In the past, developers had time to prepare for release. If bugs existed in version 3 of their app running on the iOS beta, they probably fixed those in version 4 (unreleased) of their app, and planned to submit and ship version 4 the same day as iOS 14. That entire process is not going to happen this year, so it's possible that bugs existing in iOS 14, but did not exist in 13, will be present in apps until those updates ship next week sometime.
>and certainly in no way justifies Apple being called an ‘Asshole’
I'm not calling Apple an asshole, I'm not defending the author of the article who is calling them an asshole. I'm simply explaining how it worked when I worked on a major top 50 app in the App Store. Thank god I'm not doing it anymore, it was stressful enough doing it in previous years, it's probably even worse today.
My guess is that Apple would have taken this into account when scheduling the release.
If there was some marquee feature where day 1 support was important, this would have been part of Apple’s planning.
It’s clear to me that this is really not a big deal at all and that the original author - not you - is trying to manufacture outrage where none is merited.
It’s also not clear to me that any significant end users would have reason to expect most apps to be updated on day 1.
Apps have simply never adopted all the new features they could, day 1 or not. Often adoption has been gradual. Even things that are very obvious like screen size changes sometimes have taken months to be supported.
Is it the end of the world? No, I don't think so, but it is very clearly causing a lot of developers pains today, you should at the very least acknowledge that and understand that just because you can shrug it off doesn't mean they can.
Something that is severely missing from the world of software, and I suspect engineering in general, is empathy. Hell, it's missing from the world today. Look at the political climate in the US for another big example.
So maybe that's what your takeaway should be, show a little empathy to those who are struggling today and understand that. On top of a global pandemic, on top of possibly having their kids at home and being home schooled or learning virtually, having maybe lost a loved one, maybe even had to abandon their home due to fires, that on top of any or all of that they now have to deal with the pains of an iOS release with no warning. Empathy. Try it.
I have plenty of empathy if developers are actually facing pain. Piling on to attack Apple, not so much. Apple employees also have families and many of them are in California too. I’m guessing they too are affected by all of these issues.
If the original author was able to articulate the pain they are facing, I’d have empathy for them.
They didn’t in fact do so, which is why we’re trying to figure out what the negative impacts would be.
It’s absurd also to suggest that there was an iOS release with no warning. That is simply not true. We’ve been expecting it for months, and we also knew the release schedule would be different this year.
If people are being pressured by managers in some painful way, then I do feel for them, but if that pressure is occurring because managers actually have a false understanding of what is at stake, then it is more empathetic to discuss the misunderstandings about this than it is to just nod along.
It’s really not clear at all what pain anyone should be feeling.
Presumably their apps are ready to go, and all they have to do is submit them and wait.
As we’ve already discussed, almost nobody should be actually discovering bugs now, regardless of Apple’s scheduling.
It’s just that nobody has been able to articulate why it’s any more than that.
The fact that Apple’s own software is not all updated just proves this point, since they obviously did know when it was going to be released.
Nowhere am I saying there should be no bugs. Just that this move has very little impact on bug fixing.
I'm not sure I understand?
It just isn’t a big deal.
You know nothing about me.
Until you started making personal attacks, this was simply disagreement and many interesting points were made, which is fine. Perhaps most people agree with your perspective.
You with this comment, on the other hand are literally offering nothing except ignorance to this conversation. No valuable analysis, and only incorrect facts.
I wonder why you feel the need to do this?
What would make you decide that this was helpful? Do you think you are protecting someone?
Though I'm not an mobile app developer just one of the things I can see as a downside.
Even major apps like Instagram and Snapchat still have critical camera bugs on my phone right now that's running the latest iOS14Beta8 build.